Cisco Hits Setback in Arista Suit

Cisco Hits Setback in Arista Suit

:

A judge rejected two patent violation lawsuit against Arista Cisco parts, but leaves the rest of the case move forward.Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO) hit Arista Networks Inc. in December with patent and copyright prosecution bulk load "repeated and widespread copying of the key inventions Cisco products." Forged components include implementing Cisco generic line interface (CLI), Cisco claims. (See Cisco Slams Arista With patents and copyrights massive suit.)In a July 9 decision, the judge LABSON Beth Freeman, the District Court of the United States in San Jose, granted the motion to dismiss the allegations Cisco Arista indirect patent infringement before the trial, since Cisco does not seek damages for claims before trial.Separately, Freeman Arista confirmed a motion to reject a request by Cisco Arista deliberately violated patents Cisco Cisco filed the lawsuit after.In this application, Cisco accused Arista EOS + software, released in December after the lawsuit was filed, the prosecution alleged patent infringement in the lawsuit. Cisco says Arista own press release shows "plausible that Arista has brought a new product to market, despite having been notified of the offending conduct under" search for Cisco, as decided by Freeman. (See Arista Get with the program schedule.)Arista EOS + but said it is not a new product, but rather a "new version of an existing product," says Freeman (his emphasis). The judge rejected the statement of Arista in its press release that "smokescreen".Cisco has proposed a "bright line" test "to determine when one of the parties might claim damages for willful violation" going beyond "continue selling existing products while defending accused the locker room," said FreemanBut Freeman decided that testing is pointless because Cisco "could not allege sufficient facts to satisfy its own test of" clear line "," and the existing case law covers the allegations. "Especially For software products where updates and revisions are common and frequent in a rapidly changing market, one would expect that, for most of the software products of litigation should be revised or die," says Freeman.Freeman left the door open for Cisco modifying their allegations.Freeman order giving Cisco the opportunity to amend his complaint is "exactly what we expected," said General Counsel Mark Chandler, Cisco said in a statement emailed to the reading light for Cisco spokesman.The decision leaves Arista "in the strange position" to claim that its own demands on EOS were just "window dressing," Chandler said.Chandler added. "They introduced EOS +, even after they knew of our accusations that had used our patented technologies, so there can be no doubt that their work was voluntary Its movement against the alleged obstinacy not based on the denial of counterfeiting, but rather to suggest that EOS + is just a small adjustment to his counterfeit product before. Having owned until, maybe they decide to go ahead and admit patent infringement. Claims of patent infringement They are not affected by the judge's order. "